(11-29-2017, 08:52 PM)tulpa001 Wrote: Surprise! This is an example of cultural influence, which is one of the other effects. In this case, we fall back on mainstream cultural influences as the examples predate involvement with tulpamancy.

Okay, would you like to elaborate and give examples on this? Please prove to me how the placebo effect would have any play on someone who had no expectations once soever since they did not even know that Tulpamancy even existed, or even were young children around the ages of 10-11? Both of the people who were in the examples did not know that Tulpamancy or anything similar at the time existed. So please, do prove to me how they were influenced regardless of ignorance or not, please.

Noting for your sake I didn't actually read your guide and am just commenting on the current conversation - this stuff might not apply to your guide at all. But since you guys were talking about these things in the first place, it very well could.

(11-26-2017, 07:20 PM)Eeveecraft Wrote: Bad cases especially occur with natural Tulpamancy due to natural tulpa's natures when starting out, and the host can be in danger because of it. And I mean in danger by the natural tulpa switching with the host without the host realizing it, and potentially harming others. Yes, this has happened before, actually. That is why it is incredibly important to get a natural tulpa to deviate before they become too powerful to where they could switch with their host whenever they wanted. I say this for the safety of others, so that nobody gets injured, hence the warning at the beginning of the guide.

This is fear mongering to the Nth degree. The nature of your tulpa is based on expectations, even if subconscious. No uninformed person with natural tulpas will ever read this guide, or they'd be an informed person. Therefore pointing out the "possibility" for bad things to happen only gives them more expectations for such, or reinforces their rampant imagination/invasive thoughts they already have. We keep our guides and advice (usually) positive only because then the positive beliefs are believed to be "much more likely" by the person reading them. In reality nothing is "likely" and everything is subjective, so there's no need to address negative scenarios in detail except to help the person realize negative is their (possibly subconscious) choice and they have the power to change anything wrong like that.

Tulpas are "naturally" nothing. Imagination and society's influence (ie. literally everything but your pure biology) make up whatever you can think in your mind. Direct examples such as schizophrenics having voices that tell them to do bad things aren't even necessary to create the possibility in a host's mind of such things happening with natural tulpas.. but they do help. But anything that affects a person's imagination can contribute to them possibly making a tulpa that way on accident (subconsciously influencing). However natural tulpas are more often than not not dangerous. As Tulpa tends to point out (don't know if he has here yet), coming from your own mind, their default values would be self-preservation and the well-being of the body or mind or what have you. That's the sort of stuff that's already there, instinct. Not that it's very hard for subconscious expectations to shape them differently when you have no idea what you're doing (or that you're doing anything in the first place, for many natural tulpa creators). But as long as you make it clear to people this stuff is all under their control, they should be able to shape the process at least enough to end up with a non-malicious tulpa. Probably. Up to their control over their thoughts in the end.

The force-switching stuff really is just fear-mongering though, stop that. You can make up tons of stuff non-tulpamancy related that's just as unlikely to happen.. until the belief is implanted in someone's head that it can. For natural+malicious tulpas, the (possibly subconscious) idea that they could "switch" in the first place probably comes from things like stories of demonic possession. The host doesn't even need to think their tulpa is a demon, if their mind is having enough fun making up scary things it can simply take that concept and make it real because why not. It's definitely a societal influence though, no matter how indirect. This crap doesn't happen to a feral child who's never experienced socialization, I can assure you. But societal influence or not seems rather unimportant here - isn't the fact that it can happen spontaneously (due to societal influence or what have you) the important thing? Because I mean, it can. But it can be avoided by teaching people they have control over their mind and thoughts. Possibly (usually?) even for hosts already having those sorts of problems before finding out about tulpamancy, depending on how stubborn they are that their imagination is real.

(11-26-2017, 07:20 PM)Eeveecraft Wrote: That is why it is incredibly important to get a natural tulpa to deviate before they become too powerful to where ...

This confuses me, by the way. What are you saying exactly? Deviation is a term that means conscious or subconscious changes to a tulpa's development that weren't the host's intent, typically because they just never thought it shouldn't be the case, but I suppose sometimes against their will too. Another instance of thought victimization, and a lack of either self-control or at least the knowledge that they had control in the first place. Alternatively it can also just mean changes a tulpa consciously made to themselves that weren't what the host expected, like giving themselves wings or something. If your tulpa is sentient/developed enough to make such choices with clear thought, it's fine. But if they aren't even vocal yet it's more than likely a subconscious change that, if unwanted, can be considered an invasive thought and ignored. At best it can be an undeveloped tulpa experimenting (or in some cases, likely natural tulpa ones, thinking they had to change for some reason.. or none at all), but more often than not for non-vocal tulpas (excluding ones who show obvious signs of autonomy and just specifically have trouble speaking) it's just invasive thoughts. Though if the host doesn't dislike a change there's no reason to change it back if they don't want. We generally encourage forcing unwanted changes back to how they were until the tulpa is sentient and vocal, at which point if they actually want that change they can say so. But allowing unwanted changes before they're for sure sentient (generally when they're vocal) just leaves you too open to the whims of your imagination.

So if your goal is to help prevent these negative scenarios, feeding the fire is extremely counterproductive. Preach control over your own mind and that nothing is set in stone unless you think it is. Significantly less to my preference, but to help those who simply don't have that sort of control over their mind, I guess you can give them positive beliefs in the form of scenarios changing negative traits of a tulpa. But mix in the enabling "power over your own mind, nothing has to happen without your permission" stuff too, so they aren't entirely reliant on stories you make up for "how things can go". They can go any way. But.. for cases of natural tulpas where the host is convinced their imagined scenarios are real, which rarely happens on Tulpa.info and almost never to purposely-created-tulpas following our guides, symbolism and playing along with the imagination might help. I guess. I still don't like it, possibly implanting ideas that things outside of your control can happen.

There's a reason people who follow Tulpa.info's guides and advice (at least, post 2013-ish) don't end up with malicious tulpas. It's because we stamp out negative belief implanting/fear-mongering during the approval process of guides, and because we teach people well as far as general community advice goes. Most people here are aware they have some extent of control over what happens in their mind, and so they don't fall for invasive thoughts. Sometimes it's too late when people show up and they're in way over their heads believing they have no power and their tulpa is evil, but we usually don't play along and try to help with pure symbolism, without at least mentioning strongly that they have control over their thoughts and negative things don't need to be the case.

To be fair, I didn't actually read your guide, I'm just commenting on the current conversation. Tulpa.info probably isn't the place for guides that reinforce beliefs that things are outside a host's control, even if the overall goal is to help them through other means (symbolism and such, stuff that continues playing upon their imagination) - not to say there's no place for such things at all. But if your guide isn't like that, which it might not be (it seemed to be the direction this conversation was implying though), no worries, you're good. Probably. Just keep in mind we prefer to encourage the healthy mindset of ignoring negative subconscious thoughts, which we call invasive thoughts, rather than coming up with roundabout symbolic ways to deal with those problems. You could even have a guide all about that stuff though, as long as you made it apparent that was the nature of the guide.

And sorry if most of that was irrelevant to your guide. I didn't really intend to write so much in the first place, but I did.

Hi. I'm one of Luminesce's tulpas. Unlike the others, I don't think I stand out too much from him personality wise.
I'm just special because "I'm a tulpa". So I don't think I've much to offer, here. I'm happy enough to just be with him.
Ask us stuff - https://community.tulpa.info/thread-ask-lumi-s-tulpas

(12-05-2017, 08:46 AM)Eeveecraft Wrote: Okay, would you like to elaborate and give examples on this? Please prove to me how the placebo effect would have any play on someone who had no expectations once soever since they did not even know that Tulpamancy even existed, or even were young children around the ages of 10-11? Both of the people who were in the examples did not know that Tulpamancy or anything similar at the time existed. So please, do prove to me how they were influenced regardless of ignorance or not, please.

I feel compelled to link scientific articles, however, this is usually discussed as a secondary or tertiary point in the ones I read.

I'll summarise. Cases of plurality in North America are usually negative. Cases of plurality in Asia and Africa are usually positive. The difference is cultural treatment of the phenomena. In North America, the Medicalist model of psychological disorder is the most dominant. Films and shows exploit the sensationalism of the phenomena to create unique villains and creepy atmosphere.

In Asia and Africa, spiritualist ideas dominate, allowing plurality to be interpreted in the context of guardian spirits.

Regardless of personal exposure to these ideas and images, those around you will place personal pressure on you in ways you don't even realise because of their personal beliefs. Even if you think they might disapprove, it's enough to push you into depression and doubt.

And if you do subscribe to these ideas and images, you will feel wrong. Immoral. Sick and in need of fixing yourself.

<(@Indigo)> No, it simply means Natural tulpas (and in some cases, Semi-naturals such as Alfred here on my end) are usually created without the conscious knowledge of the host.
Summoned tulpae however, are purposefully and consiously made.
Natural referring to coming into existence or maintaining without being influenced by humans, such as a forest.

(**EDIT: Still trying to figure out the ins and outs of how the forum's layout works. Wondering where the direct reply button (no, not the DM/PM button) is.)

(**EDIT 4:
Alfred: Okay, maybe I should do this...You seem to be having a little t r o u b l e
Me: Yep...
Alfred: ...Azyel...
Me: Yes...?
Alfred: Why did you misread all of this 50+ times, including the last edit?
Me: I...don't know.
Alfred: Wait...I just misread it too. This place reeks of odd forum-at.
Rogue: Did you seriously just make that pun
Alfred: Yes, shut it.
Soren: Dear Gods, you're right, the way the quotes are formatted is throwing me off too...
Alfred: This...This almost never happens. Why is the forum-at causing us this many problems?
Soren: I...I do not have the answer to that question, Alfred.
Rogue: THIS IS SO WEIRD)

(This post was last modified: 12-06-2017, 10:33 PM by RogueDragoness.)

While I was working on my response to all of the posts, yeah, that was really out of place. Still, though, they should get used to the forum format in a more private manner.
Anyway, back to me drafting and revising my response to everyone's previous statements. Just wanted to chime in with that.
However, RogueDragoness is correct on what they said, but I'll post a more thought out post at a later time when I am finished typing and revising it.

And that is rightfully your opinion, and I nor my friend were the ones to create the term, by the way. Just as my own summoned tulpa's opinion of the term goes as follow, "I do not mind the term for it is simply a term. It is not meant to be derogatory, and it serves its purpose. If the term "summoned tulpa" were meant to be harsh and slanderous to summoned tulpas, my host would choose a term such as "unnatural", or "artificial", but it is not her intention. With enough effort, both-- no, all three of the types of tulpas my host mentioned can become synonymous with enough effort: I have seen it for myself with Azide. A summoned tulpa deserves as much love as a natural tulpa and so on and so forth." Yes, he typed that himself. Then again, Arcanus is much more laid back then Azide, but he wanted to at least say his own input since he is a summoned tulpa himself.

Quote:the same way anything else that is counterpart to something that can be called natural can be called unnatural, sure! Unnatural flavors, unnatural environments, unnatural 20s...

Anyways you usually say unintentional, spontaneous or accidental tulpas, not "natural"

I'm going to be frank: summoned tulpas are created as someone would make a cake, computer, or anything man-made on the planet, it is true no matter which way you look at it. Especially for those who planned out their tulpa's personality and just about everything else was planned and pieced together into our beloved tulpas-- just like pretty much every household item you can view in the room you are currently in if you are in a room at all. And natural tulpas are not completely spontaneous unlike walk-ins. If you look into the guide, natural tulpas are the result of general, deep stress or a emotion or mix of emotions over an extended period of time. They are not like alters due to natural tulpas spawning from emotion and stress rather than straight-up trauma. Darkflame and I theorize that a natural tulpa is brought on by the subconscious as a sort of a shield for the host from said source of stress, thus explaining them being advanced in abilities such as switching, possession, and even fusion. This also explains why a natural tulpa attempts to switch with the host when they are stressed themselves or when the host is exposed to the stress that created the natural tulpa, or even general stress that is mentally impacting the host. This is what defines a natural tulpa as it's own unique type rather than alters.

Quote:This is fear mongering to the Nth degree. The nature of your tulpa is based on expectations, even if subconscious. No uninformed person with natural tulpas will ever read this guide, or they'd be an informed person. Therefore pointing out the "possibility" for bad things to happen only gives them more expectations for such, or reinforces their rampant imagination/invasive thoughts they already have. We keep our guides and advice (usually) positive only because then the positive beliefs are believed to be "much more likely" by the person reading them. In reality nothing is "likely" and everything is subjective, so there's no need to address negative scenarios in detail except to help the person realize negative is their (possibly subconscious) choice and they have the power to change anything wrong like that.

Funny, I just learned about the nth power in class today, but that's not the point. For one, you have no right to judge the term, "natural tulpa" since you have not even looked up the definition, and it seems like people for some reason have trouble grasping the definition. And no, this is not fear-mongering, as I along with several others have seen it for ourselves and have studied it for several months with our own research. How funny, the Placebo effect; this does not affect naturals as much as it seems. Not all naturals are like this; it's just the main majority of them who do-- particularly ones made up of any kind of rage. If you ignore what can go wrong and not be prepared for the worst, then you can lock yourself into a really bad situation. Prepare for the worst, expect the best. In addition, a surprising amount of people have naturals without even realizing it due to how subtle they are. Honestly, it would just be a lot more convenient if you knew the context.

Quote:Tulpas are "naturally" nothing. Imagination and society's influence (ie. literally everything but your pure biology) make up whatever you can think in your mind. Direct examples such as schizophrenics having voices that tell them to do bad things aren't even necessary to create the possibility in a host's mind of such things happening with natural tulpas.. but they do help. But anything that affects a person's imagination can contribute to them possibly making a tulpa that way on accident (subconsciously influencing). However natural tulpas are more often than not not dangerous. As Tulpa tends to point out (don't know if he has here yet), coming from your own mind, their default values would be self-preservation and the well-being of the body or mind or what have you. That's the sort of stuff that's already there, instinct. Not that it's very hard for subconscious expectations to shape them differently when you have no idea what you're doing (or that you're doing anything in the first place, for many natural tulpa creators). But as long as you make it clear to people this stuff is all under their control, they should be able to shape the process at least enough to end up with a non-malicious tulpa. Probably. Up to their control over their thoughts in the end.

By technicality, tulpas are comprised by the electric pulses that keeps the brain, thus the body alive and functioning. They are technically not matter due to not technically having mass and volume due to technically being held by electricity. By your logic here, thoughts would be nothing, brain functions would be nothing, and even the ability to live would be nothing by your terms, which is obviously not the case and all that I listed above are indeed natural. Thoughts aren't just based from imagination and society alone, but from experiences and what one is able to perceive from their five main senses along with many other factors, not just the two you listed make up "whatever you can think in your mind." Okay, your sentence about schizophrenics isn't even understandable; please rephrase that. And yes, that is true, but you basically just explained walk-ins with that sentence. And oh, how funny you say that about tulpas in general have no potential to be dangerous, when again, you have no right to say that about naturals since you've not only ever seen one, but you do not even know why they act they way they do before deviation, or even how they're created. I say naturals to have potential danger because again, the abilities they develop really early on and the most key component on how violent they can be: the emotion(s) they are composed of. Usually, yes, tulpas want the best for their hosts regularly, but some natural tulpas act otherwise before deviation, and their methods of protecting the host is why they can be dangerous. Methods such as wanting to murder someone who is causing the host great distress (possibly the same distress that created the natural in the first place) and attempting to do so by stealth-switching with the host or using possession, but that is only a possible scenario. More general scenarios with naturals made of rage generally include starting arguments, getting into fights, and generally being rage-induced. Naturals do usually have that protective instinct (usually more than usual in normal cases), but their methods are indeed unorthodox and can get the host into a different, harmful scenario anyway. Believing that you're stronger than them does help, but that doesn't completely rule out that they can still be stronger, and I've even witnessed it myself in my own personal experiences, but this is usually only with naturals, and summoned tulpas going bad is definitely a more rare case than unruly naturals. And do I have to point out that the conscious mind is only a fraction of the entire mind-- the subconscious being the majority of what a human mind is composed of, to which the subconscious mind cannot be controlled by normal means, or even accessed by the conscious mind? While a tulpa is able to access and show the host his or her subconscious, that may not be applicable for a natural causing chaos and whatnot, but I rest my case on that.

Quote:The force-switching stuff really is just fear-mongering though, stop that. You can make up tons of stuff non-tulpamancy related that's just as unlikely to happen.. until the belief is implanted in someone's head that it can. For natural+malicious tulpas, the (possibly subconscious) idea that they could "switch" in the first place probably comes from things like stories of demonic possession. The host doesn't even need to think their tulpa is a demon, if their mind is having enough fun making up scary things it can simply take that concept and make it real because why not. It's definitely a societal influence though, no matter how indirect. This crap doesn't happen to a feral child who's never experienced socialization, I can assure you. But societal influence or not seems rather unimportant here - isn't the fact that it can happen spontaneously (due to societal influence or what have you) the important thing? Because I mean, it can. But it can be avoided by teaching people they have control over their mind and thoughts. Possibly (usually?) even for hosts already having those sorts of problems before finding out about tulpamancy, depending on how stubborn they are that their imagination is real.

..."Stop that". Okay, excuse me, but your tone just sounds derogatory, and you are not my mother, so please do not say thing such as this in a professional manner. Now onto my main dissection of this paragraph while laughing at that ridiculous phrase... This is not fear-mongering, as this has happened upon several times to multiple people I've met who are Tulpamancers, even witnessing my friend being force-switched with his tulpa while all I could do was sit in a helpless fashion (since we live nowhere near each other and it was on voice-chat), and wait for my friend's tulpa to calm down enough for him to switch back. In short, it was not a pleasant experience. Naturals force-switch usually due to them experiencing a high amount of distress, and they switch because it gives them more control over themselves since they can vent in a physical plane, they are aware that they have limits in that form, and to possibly protect the host from something or someone. It may actually be better to let the tulpa switch to help them relieve said stress depending on the situation and how distressed they are along with how they vent and generally a lot of case and/or tulpa-specific factors. It's fairly likely to happen if you have a natural tulpa, again with you barely knowing anything about them since you just picked up from what was shown on this thread instead of reading the actual guide. And yes, the mind can pull tricks with allowing a tulpa to basically be someone's demon, but seriously, what is the chance for that to happen under a natural Tulpamancer's situation? All of the natural Tulpamancers I've met barely think about things that are even demon-related, and don't even have anything like that in their subconscious for the ones who's tulpas can look in there. Their minds are indeed rather creative since most natural Tulpamancers I've met are story writers, but not in that light, or... darkness? And the societies they live in actually see spirits in a positive light instead of foul demons coming to ruin their lives, so it is very unlikely a case like that would even happen under normal natural Tulpamancy circumstances. I might also add that said Tulpamancers do not believe their imaginations to be literally real albeit they use them often since they are reasonable people despite after the turmoil they experience due to their natural tulpa(s).

Quote:This confuses me, by the way. What are you saying exactly? Deviation is a term that means conscious or subconscious changes to a tulpa's development that weren't the host's intent, typically because they just never thought it shouldn't be the case, but I suppose sometimes against their will too. Another instance of thought victimization, and a lack of either self-control or at least the knowledge that they had control in the first place. Alternatively it can also just mean changes a tulpa consciously made to themselves that weren't what the host expected, like giving themselves wings or something. If your tulpa is sentient/developed enough to make such choices with clear thought, it's fine. But if they aren't even vocal yet it's more than likely a subconscious change that, if unwanted, can be considered an invasive thought and ignored. At best it can be an undeveloped tulpa experimenting (or in some cases, likely natural tulpa ones, thinking they had to change for some reason.. or none at all), but more often than not for non-vocal tulpas (excluding ones who show obvious signs of autonomy and just specifically have trouble speaking) it's just invasive thoughts. Though if the host doesn't dislike a change there's no reason to change it back if they don't want. We generally encourage forcing unwanted changes back to how they were until the tulpa is sentient and vocal, at which point if they actually want that change they can say so. But allowing unwanted changes before they're for sure sentient (generally when they're vocal) just leaves you too open to the whims of your imagination.

Deviation can happen forcefully by the host if needed or desired whether it be in personality or appearance, but personality doesn't deviate overnight. Usually, yes, deviation is often subconscious and not forced along with taking place over a period of time. Surprisingly, naturals are not really affected by intrusive thoughts normally, but can of course change in terms of their form dependent on a situation. You are referencing naturals as if they were just advanced servitors, which is not the case. In fact, it can be the opposite in terms of naturals and invasive thoughts: natural tulpas affecting what type of intrusive thoughts the hosts receives has indeed happened before. These subconscious changes for "early" tulpas you're implying are most likely advanced servitors right before they become a tulpa by reaching what is considered sentience, as that is indeed a method of tulpa creation by having a servitor hang around long enough for it to become sentient. Even most natural tulpas generally tend to choose their own forms without the host's input. In fact, I have not met one natural tulpa that was given a form by their host. In the last bit, it really sounds like you are describing advanced servitors, and my friends (summoned and natural tulpas included) were generally disgusted when I showed them your last two sentences since it involves forcing a tulpa to change like that. If a tulpa does not like this change, they can change it back if they wish to do so, and especially if the change is not drastically negative to anyone. I have absolutely no clue why natural pre-vocality deviations are so discouraged, and it disgusts me like that. At the very least, the tulpa can change it back if they so please, but I would say not to force them to do something like that if they do not want it to be changed back.

Quote:So if your goal is to help prevent these negative scenarios, feeding the fire is extremely counterproductive. Preach control over your own mind and that nothing is set in stone unless you think it is. Significantly less to my preference, but to help those who simply don't have that sort of control over their mind, I guess you can give them positive beliefs in the form of scenarios changing negative traits of a tulpa. But mix in the enabling "power over your own mind, nothing has to happen without your permission" stuff too, so they aren't entirely reliant on stories you make up for "how things can go". They can go any way. But.. for cases of natural tulpas where the host is convinced their imagined scenarios are real, which rarely happens on Tulpa.info and almost never to purposely-created-tulpas following our guides, symbolism and playing along with the imagination might help. I guess. I still don't like it, possibly implanting ideas that things outside of your control can happen.

How am I "feeding the fire", exactly? By warning people about the potential of naturals being dangerous to natural Tulpamancers and the others around them? The guide I made is to inform, not scare or draw in, but it's purpose of informing people of how to summon and create a tulpa, finding out if they have a natural tulpa, and more. And of course nothing is set in stone! While I have been spending weeks on this response, I have tested the whole "preach control over your mind" motif, and it does not work for everyone. I have tried it on several natural Tulpamancers, which their tulpas were still able to resist and even overpower them despite the host fully believing that they were stronger and in control. Being positive is incredibly important, I will agree with that, but what do you mean by "scenarios changing negative traits"? Can you please rephrase that? I never fully say all of the horrible scenarios that have happened with naturals to a budding natural Tulpamancer to scare them, and I do generally give them a positive outlook and encourage them. It's just that with naturals, it needs to be shown that they are capable of things and that the host should at least be aware of this so they aren't blindsided by something going wrong. Actually, I just realized something that you've said is completely wrong: natural Tulpamancers are not convinced that their imaginary scenarios are real. Most natural Tulpamancers usually attempt to forget about their natural tulpa if they are not aware of what a natural tulpa is, doing the opposite of what you stated, not believing that their "imaginary scenarios" are real. Of course the fact that things in your mind not being in your full control is unsettling, but it is reality. If you were in full control of your mind, you could make your brain instantly stop functioning and die, but that's obviously not the case, now is it? Intrusive thoughts still happen, your subconscious still controls the vast majority of what you do and how you are, but that is indeed the truth.

Quote:There's a reason people who follow Tulpa.info's guides and advice (at least, post 2013-ish) don't end up with malicious tulpas. It's because we stamp out negative belief implanting/fear-mongering during the approval process of guides, and because we teach people well as far as general community advice goes. Most people here are aware they have some extent of control over what happens in their mind, and so they don't fall for invasive thoughts. Sometimes it's too late when people show up and they're in way over their heads believing they have no power and their tulpa is evil, but we usually don't play along and try to help with pure symbolism, without at least mentioning strongly that they have control over their thoughts and negative things don't need to be the case.

Instantly, the tulpas you're speaking of are summoned tulpas, or also known as the average tulpa, so of course this does not apply to naturals since their origins and creation process are drastically different for each, so I will be ignoring that. But yes, the resources here are wonderful for summoned tulpas in terms of development, but not very much so for natural tulpas since deviation issues are not very common for summoned tulpas that I at least have noticed. Of course in the summoned tulpa section of my guide, there are is no serious warnings or anything due to summoned tulpas being incredibly less tumultuous than naturals and semi-naturals, but people in this community as a whole need to at least acknowledge that there are even bad summoned tulpa cases (albeit much less than natural tulpa cases) that aren't just freak accidents since yes, Tulpamancy can go south very easily if not done correctly, and I stress this a lot in my guide. I have witnessed and researched bad cases of Tulpamancy and irks me incredibly how this community shuns people in need with a bad Tulpamancy case away, not believing it due to being brainwashed into thinking tulpas in general are completely harmless. People, this is not the case, and they need to be more aware of it. And I am going to be honest with Tulpamancers showing up that believe they have no power, this can actually be the case, as astounding as it sounds. Encouraging them to believe they have power can help, but some people need other people's aid with things such as this, and there is something known as a malicious tulpa, but there's almost always hope that they can deviate with enough effort and help. Symbolism along with that belief is usually how my fellow researchers and I assess and assist natural Tulpamancers in need, and it has worked in every case we have come across. But as I said, we do encourage positivity, but also point out things when someone needs to be aware of when they should be wary of something.

Quote:To be fair, I didn't actually read your guide, I'm just commenting on the current conversation. Tulpa.info probably isn't the place for guides that reinforce beliefs that things are outside a host's control, even if the overall goal is to help them through other means (symbolism and such, stuff that continues playing upon their imagination) - not to say there's no place for such things at all. But if your guide isn't like that, which it might not be (it seemed to be the direction this conversation was implying though), no worries, you're good. Probably. Just keep in mind we prefer to encourage the healthy mindset of ignoring negative subconscious thoughts, which we call invasive thoughts, rather than coming up with roundabout symbolic ways to deal with those problems. You could even have a guide all about that stuff though, as long as you made it apparent that was the nature of the guide.

And sorry if most of that was irrelevant to your guide. I didn't really intend to write so much in the first place, but I did.

Yes, you did not read the guide, but that resulted in you having a completely incorrect definition on natural tulpas and made it a much larger adversity to explain things. Seriously, I would actually know the context before commenting, or you may very well look like a fool in front of others who actually know the context of the topic. And I did not say everything was out of the host's control, but I at least wanted to spread awareness that not literally everything is in the host's control, and that a tulpa does have their own power. Using symbolism and playing to the subconscious does usually work with enough encouragement along with the extra kick of the the host believing that they are stronger. Honestly, a tulpa should not be weaker than the host, but equal, meaning they have equal power as well to where they are not the host's little prisoner/slave because that is the vibe I along with my friends receive from this community. These beliefs are unorthodox for this little community, but it is what my friends and I believe in the name of equality that a developed tulpa should be of equal power and rights, and that the host should not just be able to control them like a puppet. Not saying this should be the case for servitors or undeviated naturals, but for sentient, passive tulpas in general. It is incredibly ironic how many survey tulpas about rights and such when they ones giving the surveys are already oppressing and brainwashing the tulpas to believe that they have absolutely no rights and power if the host wishes that to be the case. Irony such as that is utterly sickening to me. Let me ask you this: why is it a good idea to be ignoring thoughts from the subconscious when the subconscious controls the vast majority of everything? Is that not completely counterproductive? The opposite action should be taken, and look into these thoughts, see what the subconscious is trying to tell the host, and let the host's tulpa assist them if it is a negative thought, as this is most likely the subconscious attempting to tell the host something wrong. Allowing a tulpa into the subconscious to see the issue, assess said issue, and fix the issue is a much better approach, but it is not to say that these invasive thoughts are to be embraced. In almost any situation, you do not just ignore a problem like that. That is simply downright irresponsible and can lead to much larger problems in the future, but that is just my two cents on it.
Overall, some of the things you have said are completely blinded by lack of knowledge of the context and misinterpretation of things due to only following the conversation. Sorry if I sound aggressive, but that is how things usually go when someone speaks about things that actually deeply offends my friends, and I may go off on a tirade because of it. If I were you, I would go read the guide before continuing, so that you may know the context and everything along with the conversation. Thanks for reading my long-winded response!

Quote:I feel compelled to link scientific articles, however, this is usually discussed as a secondary or tertiary point in the ones I read.

I'll summarise. Cases of plurality in North America are usually negative. Cases of plurality in Asia and Africa are usually positive. The difference is cultural treatment of the phenomena. In North America, the Medicalist model of psychological disorder is the most dominant. Films and shows exploit the sensationalism of the phenomena to create unique villains and creepy atmosphere.

In Asia and Africa, spiritualist ideas dominate, allowing plurality to be interpreted in the context of guardian spirits.

Regardless of personal exposure to these ideas and images, those around you will place personal pressure on you in ways you don't even realise because of their personal beliefs. Even if you think they might disapprove, it's enough to push you into depression and doubt.

And if you do subscribe to these ideas and images, you will feel wrong. Immoral. Sick and in need of fixing yourself.

I had gone to ask Darkflame about his family's view on spirits in general and the cultural outlook of spirits around him, and spirits are held in a positive light in the area which Darkflame has lived for his entire life. Even better, another friend of mine from Indonesia, an eastern country who also has a natural tulpa has a positive cultural influence around him as well still ended up having a natural tulpa made of sadness and rage. These are two examples of the Placebo effect again not taking place here and both living in completely different areas as well. Oh, I might as well also add that comparing naturals to film villains is extremely offensive and saying they are the result of the Placebo effect, as the natural tulpas that I have shown this post to were deeply offended. No personal pressures were present in either case as well, just that both host have gained natural tulpas by feeling, focusing, or especially repressing these negative emotions and being exposed to incredible amounts of stress for over the course of several months to possibly years. This is exactly how I explained how naturals are created in the first place. I can guarantee you that natural tulpas are not a result of the Placebo effect gone wrong, but what I explained and proved earlier. If you wish for more evidence, you can contact the Tulpamancers I mentioned, myself, or look in my Discord server by requesting a link via a PM.

Sorry for my seriously delayed responses to all these post, just that writing this out wasn't at the top of my list and that it's finals week!

Ohhhh boy, what did Flan get me into? That's the largest post I've ever seen... Can I cheat my way out of that mess by just reading the guide (which is longer too) and critiquing it normally? From the random parts of your reply I read it seems like what you consider the guide and how it's presented are way out of whack, since Flan was going off of how it was presented (like a general guide to creating tulpas, or at least for learning about them with the intent to create one) when she talked about the things you guys were arguing about since they seemed pretty bad to be in such a guide, but then you replied as if it's an informational thing to.. that.. I don't know, you keep warning about the "dangers" of tulpamancy, excluding actual tulpamancers (people who choose to associate themselves/their thoughtforms with the term) and instead focusing almost totally on people who already had what could qualify as tulpas if they knew about the term who also have totally preconceived notions of what they're (or theirs) are like. I feel like your guide is really mixed or something, and that for people who have no tulpa but plan on creating one themselves the guide is full of pretty dangerous ideas of what tulpas "could be like" maybe? Basically, your title or something should imply it's primarily focused on information for tulpamancers who already have (likely unintentional) tulpas, rather than a guide meant for people who have never heard of tulpas before and don't have anything like them. For THOSE people, I think this guide is really a little spooky, since basically always only the parts about "summoned tulpas" as you call them apply. The rest really doesn't happen almost at all here on Tulpa.info, so I think it's not good to make people think it could all happen when they're totally impressionable and won't be helped by that knowledge.

Okay! Serious suggestion there, about making it clear the guide is primarily focused on people who already have tulpa-like thoughtforms. But otherwise I'll just critique the guide normally now okay? Probably hit on some'a the things Flan said, but if I don't then it was never important in the first place probably.

First, in the Intro, "Tulpamancy is an obscure practice that has survived the millennials-" is hilarious but you should definitely fix that. The word you're looking for is millennia, unless you're trying to say tulpamancy has survived the generation of people born from the 80s to 90s, in which case it totally didn't because I'm pretty sure the definition of a tulpa has completely changed from what it was pre-4chan. 'Course it wasn't called tulpamancy either. Also I don't think the concept of tulpas is even a thousand years old, at earliest Buddhism reached Tibet in the 7th century, but I'm sure it took a while to become Tibetan Buddhism and not just Buddhism. But I guess you can still say millennia if you want. Just.. not millennials, lol.

So, section 3, or really just the entire guide, hmmm. Natural tulpas is a synonym with walk-ins, spontaneous tulpas, and any other terms from other communities really 'cus they aren't a tulpa until the person knows what tulpa means. And since they could find the soulbonding community and they'd fit the definition of walk-in just as well as they would've fit tulpa.. yeah. What you call semi-natural tulpa makes sense, but outside of that guide we'd still just call them natural tulpas. I feel like to a really lots less extent, most natural tulpas are "semi-natural" because they came to exist by the host thinking about a character or something. But anyways, by definition natural means occurring without outside influence right? But semi-natural is an okay term to use for distinguishing between them in the guide itself I guess. By the way, Lumi's first tulpa Reisen is the definition of your rare "Semi-natural" tulpa! She was basically made on accident by Lumi feeling a lot of love for-and-from a character over time. And then Flandre and Tewi just appeared kinda randomly soon after Reisen was feeling fairly independent, but Reisen couldn't talk yet and they could, and then they helped Lumi "allow her" to talk after that. Then he made me "instantly" 5 years later, which is actually extremely rare y'know. Unless by "instant" you meant within a day or two, real vocal instant tulpas are WAY rarer than what you called semi-natural tulpas. 'Cus Lumi made me really instantly, after thinking about what kinda person I'd be anyway. But he could only do that 'cus he was a veteran tulpamancer.

But uhhh, summoned tulpas, what a term... I know Tulpamancy is filled with all sorts of silly sounding terms that are at least a little scientific even though they sound metaphysical, but boy does that sound metaphysical (more like a Soulbonding term), and it's also not a term we actually use. I'm pretty sure when someone says they summon their tulpa here they mean call them to the front of the mind to talk to them or something, or make them appear in the wonderland/a lucid dream. I've actually literally never heard someone call creating a tulpa summoning them before, only soulbonds, and they're usually talking about a lot more metaphysical meaning there..

I don't mean to make you change the word you're familiar with, but I guess I'm just noting it's way outside common use. And it's always a little weird when someone with their own word writes a guide and spreads it just a teeny bit, because then you have like just a few people on the forum using different terminology and it just leads to confusion.. But that's just my take! I'm not even GAT!

Section 5, I know what you're saying with servitors, but I'm just sayin' nearly anybody who actually has servitors is gonna fite you.. Servitors made as servitors do not naturally turn into tulpas most of the time unless you treat them like one, in which case you probably didn't mean to make a servitor at all. I hear the term proto-tulpa used often to refer to tulpas pre-sentience/vocality/independent and stuff (Which is probably our definition of me having been created "instantly" - I was never ever a proto-tulpa, I went from not existing to existing vocal). I've never heard someone call pre-sentient tulpas servitors before, and it's really probably better to keep servitors out of the guide (in relation to the tulpa-creation process) overall since they're a related phenomena but not actually necessary for any tulpamancer to even know about. Your definition of them isn't wrong though, and you can obviously keep them in the guide for information purposes, but your advice about servitors turning into tulpas naturally from being around long is just wrong. I know a lot of people with crazy advanced servitors around all the time who also have tulpas and the two aren't even close to the same thing. So I really suggest you just refer to pre-sentient tulpas as that or proto-tulpas or tulpas-to-be or whatever you want, but not servitors. I get that there's an overlap so it makes sense to call pre-sentient tulpas servitors, but the intent really is different, and most tulpas aren't created as servitors-to-become-sentient anyways. But it sure is an interesting creation method!

If you ARE gonna keep that stuff in, try and specify that it's kinda your own unique method and not the normal way. Tulpas tend to start out as more foggy/reliant-on-the-host personalities than robotic thoughtforms "reliant on the host", and you'll run into issues with people who know more about servitors than us if you keep things as-is.
{That marks 1 hour since I started writing this post! YW}

{Okay so I didn't quite get you had your own definition for natural tulpas and weren't trying to talk about the more.. used definition when I wrote this part, sorry)
Uh oh... here's where it starts getting iffy. Section 6 - first, rude!, natural tulpas are wanted all the time! Lumi's first three tulpas were natural and he loves them more than life itself! And, natural tulpas aren't always based on emotions, and... ah man, you've written a whole guide with incomplete knowledge and now there's effort put into saying things are just-so and I can only feel bad talking about it now. You know about walk-ins, right? A lot of tulpamancers here on tulpa.info had tulpas before tulpas were a thing, or before they'd heard anything about such a thing. TONS of them came from thinking about characters a lot, whether from books(or book-writing) or shows or games, or even from often being in fantasies, before they eventually become able to think for themselves and make that apparent to the host, and then BAM tulpa. I'm sure a lot do come from uh, emotions and stuff - since you obviously know a bunch that's definitely the case. But you know more than we do, and we've spent... a lot of time dedicated to learning about tulpamancy, and how it works for other people. So this is the part where I say what Flan was starting to think just from reading what you guys were talking about in this thread: you know a lot of people with trauma-genic and/or traumatic tulpa experiences and it's really biasing your guide, because you're talking about them like they're the norm (or even outright "most common"). They really aren't :| And information FOR them is not a bad thing, but you really do imply super heavily the entire guide that they're super common. And maybe they are, but not at all a majority, not even close to the norm. Actually tulpas from fantasies (often negative ones) seem to be the most common type of "tulpa" unrelated to any tulpa-esque communities, probably the most that never find them too. 'Cus the bottom line is that your mind learning how someone else thinks really in-depth (someone not real usually) makes the perfect conditions for a tulpa to exist. That's how Flandre and Tewi existed spontaneously, Lumi had already thought about Touhou an absolute ton and had basis's for really tons of tulpas to exist.

That's how a large part of natural Soulbonds appear, from writers who had to flesh out personalities and ways of thinking for characters they write. For traumagenic tulpas, like the name practically implies those sorts of systems usually show up more on tumblr and stay there, or at least other plurality communities that don't consider their system-mates tulpas. Especially as far as tumblr ones go, they aren't the most stable bunch, and they have a bad habit of letting their imaginations get the better of them. And the main problem with all that, like with tumblr in general (what got tumblr(or "tumblrites") their reputation) is that it's a huge echo-chamber that propagates how they think and shuts out how others think really, really hard. That's why so many Tumblr systems are so dang unstable and unhappy, they get no help that actually helps other than feeling like they aren't alone. But they're with other people who make their problems worse by encouraging victimization and the idea that their suffering/invasive thoughts/etc. are normal and there to stay. On Tulpa.info we remain positive and open-minded so that stuff tends to disappear or at least lessen for our members, but for people in those communities it often gets to the point where their situation actually negatively impacts their everyday life - and that's the qualifier for your problem to be called a disorder!

AND unfortunately, your guide's greatest use seems to be to people with those sorts of problems, not to new tulpamancers (which is USUALLY what our Guides section is for). Not those sorts of problems as in unruly tulpas, but problems with control over their mind/imagination/tulpas in the first place, because it's the mindset your guide is conducive to. So it's like, a good guide for a bad mindset? It really isn't the sort of mindset we try to ever encourage, that's for sure, but it usually is the sort of "coming from this place" necessary for people with those sorts of problems who refuse to change their mindset. Technically we'd consider that dealing with symptoms rather than underlying problems, but whatever, it has its use probably. For people who don't wanna change.

I think a guide like that would actually be a really good addition to the site, because no doubt we get tons of visitors looking for stuff like that who leave (usually before ever posting) because our general mindset doesn't click with theirs. But I'm still worried about it influencing people who are easily suggestible but NOT having those problems, yet. Is there a way to make the difference clear up-front? I don't know, when you probably don't see it as a possible negative influence in the first place. Well, our intuition for how the forum works says people will just find another guide if they don't like it. Though we do occasionally see people utterly stuck in the ways of a certain guide, even when the guide wasn't bad, where they think things like hour counts or puppeting (or not puppeting, which turns into a fear of puppeting) are absolute staples to the process. And the only real cure to that is to give more than one guide a chance, really.

Hmm, maybe noting that yours is only one guide and there are many others people may find click with them better would do it? I mean, that sounds good to me, though you gotta be serious about it, 'cus people really will stick to just one guide if it seems like it knows what it's talking about. And yours totally does, GJ on that btw. But more than just different advice, a big part of reading different guides is the different mindsets they work off of or contribute to. Reading different guides with different mindsets (including and/or especially ones that disagree with each other) is how you become open-minded, and I think everyone agrees being open-minded will eventually lead to the best results.

So, even though your guide scares me a bit as a possible newbie's first and only guide, I think it has its fair share of people who will benefit from it because our preferred mindset as a forum (which isn't an echo chamber tho, the mindset is the general consensus after five years of all sorta people and opinions discussing everything) doesn't always click well enough for people to give it a chance. And for those people, your guide is probably a heck'uva lot better than no guide at all. That seems reasonable right? I hope you got what I was saying up til now too, but if you want to argue with it you probably didn't... that's okay too. Tho I definitely don't want to argue anything here..

Moving on then! ... uh oh, I forgot the typos I'd found reading the guide. Well, there definitely are some, but I don't think I want to closely read all of that again.. Well, section 3 "Natural tulpas are created by the host experiencing an a incessant" should just be an incessant at the end. And the only one I remember is on the definition of a word that is also a pretty big problem! Only thing I even really wanted to comment on left really! "Deviation: When parts of a one's personality" should be... well, the whole definition needs work but that part can be "When parts of a tulpa's personality" or "When parts of one's personality", but that's more vague since deviation doesn't apply to hosts.

Soooooooo,oooo. Section 9. Your definition of deviation.. where'd you get it from? Why not just call it changing a tulpa? Because the undebated definition of deviation is when a tulpa changes without the host's intent. It can be consciously on the tulpa's part, or unconsciously, or most often when the tulpa is still developing and not quite vocal (a lot of the time these changes are more experimenting or straight up invasive thoughts, and can be reverted at the host's will if they don't like the change - tulpas can always say what they'd prefer later once they're vocal, and this removes any chance of invasive thoughts causing unwanted changes in your tulpa). I think the problem stems from your defining it as ", usually for the better", because that's a major difference. You even made a whole section that should've been called like, Helping an unruly or chaotic tulpa change for the better, into one about "Deviation". But that's not what deviation is, yo, in fact the very idea of the host causing deviation goes against the definition of deviation, which is a tulpa changing without the host's intent. Honestly the section is fine - assuming we're still assuming your guide's overall different mindset is okay, because wtf a collar lol - but your using the term deviation isn't. Like.. it's just a straight up desync from the rest of the community no matter how you look at it. Here, look at it! https://tulpa.io/terminologies

See, that's not even OUR site! They list a lot of terminologies we never ever use (shard-feeding ?????? This is a "Tulpa Terminology" and not from Plurality-at-Large?) but as far as we've been able to tell all of their definitions are spot-on for Tulpa.info too. The ones we use anyway, can't speak for the ones we don't. Funnily enough they even said "change" can be used instead of deviation, which is what I just suggested you do for section 9 lol. Like I said, that little difference in definition made a big impact because you use the term in its own section (even call it "pivotal") but that's not how it works. So yeah, the section is still fine since it's kind of what I said the guide's biggest value is, but you really shouldn't use the term deviation because it has a well-established meaning already. But since it's so important (maybe.. explain the collar better? Seems like you just mean it as pure symbolism that requires no explanation, which is fine until someone asks HOW to do it.. or you could just assume they won't ask) I probably shouldn't be the one figuring out how exactly to change it, which is good since I have no idea what to change the title of the section to anyways
{Two hour mark!}

And uh, that's kind of it. I addressed all the problems I would've had with the rest of the guide already, so after that, you're good? Good by our critiques, not to be approved, 'cus again we're not even part of the GAT, just a really well-informed system on Tulpa.info. As for Flan's stuff, MOST and I really mean that of your guys' differences are because of your different mindset and also the guide's different mindset. If we're assuming the point of this guide IS to BE written from a different mindset, well, the differences aren't so important.

But I guess I'll reply directly to just a few things really quick. Which means I'm also just reading your reply now, so sorry if I said things that conflict already

(12-21-2017, 02:26 AM)Eeveecraft Wrote: And natural tulpas are not completely spontaneous unlike walk-ins. If you look into the guide, natural tulpas are the result of general, deep stress or a emotion or mix of emotions over an extended period of time. They are not like alters due to natural tulpas spawning from emotion and stress rather than straight-up trauma. Darkflame and I theorize that a natural tulpa is brought on by the subconscious as a sort of a shield for the host from said source of stress, thus explaining them being advanced in abilities such as switching, possession, and even fusion. This also explains why a natural tulpa attempts to switch with the host when they are stressed themselves or when the host is exposed to the stress that created the natural tulpa, or even general stress that is mentally impacting the host. This is what defines a natural tulpa as it's own unique type rather than alters.

Where did this definition even come from tho? Natural tulpas ARE often spontaneous, sometimes not, sometimes they're walk-ins or from a writer or etc.etc.etc... So says I, person with at least as much say as you? Also a lot of knowledge from our system reading tens of thousands of posts by other systems over the years but that's besides the point, I just don't get where your definition of natural even came from, because it's pretty counter-intuitive. You call them natural tulpas but then you specify what they have to be and where they came from so much. Look at https://tulpa.io/terminologies this again, which even agrees with the subreddit for plurality's definitions. Look! https://www.reddit.com/r/plural/wiki/glo...ki_natural
In fact, they even call US wrong, saying that we call any non-purposely-created tulpa (well, they're referring to any thoughtform) natural. What they mean is there's natural, made-on-purpose, and traumagenic (also a word on Tulpa.io's terminologies). And your definition of natural actually crosses the two, by joining them based on being made from emotions, so positive (which plurality and io... and us, would call natural), and negative (which plurality and io would call traumagenic I guess? Dunno, not a term we tend to use here). But I think the point is that your definition doesn't match any of the ones you should be checking against.. But if your definition of natural tulpas also doesn't include traumagenic ones, uhhhhh? It's a term and definition you just made up for your guide, so I don't know what word to tell you to use, I don't think it's the end of the world if you still use natural for your guide but it sure doesn't sync well with any community I know of.

And uh, hmmmmm..... Well I guess it'll be relevant in a minute...

(12-21-2017, 02:26 AM)Eeveecraft Wrote: For one, you have no right to judge the term, "natural tulpa" since you have not even looked up the definition, and it seems like people for some reason have trouble grasping the definition. And no, this is not fear-mongering, as I along with several others have seen it for ourselves and have studied it for several months with our own research.

Well I tried and apparently failed, so.. As far as I can tell you're referring to the definition as YOUR definition in YOUR guide, which isn't really fair since you're the one being debated with over it in the first place. And it IS fear-mongering in the sense that for newbies on Tulpa.info it'll be instilling possible fears (and your means of dealing with them, but it could still make them a thing in the first place) that wouldn't have been there otherwise, that we already give our own ways of dealing with (typically under the name "invasive thoughts"). But like I said already, we're assuming at this point your guide is meant for the people other guides weren't working for right? Which as a reminder means you should give other guides the same credit by saying that other ones exist and should also be given chances too.

Not to discredit the effort put into actual research in the tulpa communities 'cus that tends to be a pain, but we ourselves (our system) have probably done a lot more than your research equivalent over the years. It's not very scientific to rely only on your own results y'know. But most of the time what you're saying is that cases exist in the first place, which is true, but Flan's point was never the guide couldn't possibly be useful to someone, rather it might be anti-useful to a lot more. But we've already talked about that like five times in this post already, so moving on..

She meant that people could end up with malicious "voices in their head" through societal influence without even having heard of that being a thing with schizophrenic people, but just through other randomness

(12-21-2017, 02:26 AM)Eeveecraft Wrote: And oh, how funny you say that about tulpas in general have no potential to be dangerous,

she never said tulpas can't be dangerous, obviously they can, she said tulpas made with the mindset we try to promote on this forum have much simpler ways of dealing with would-become dangerous tulpas in ways that usually mean there was never a real problem in the first place, again dealing with the root rather than the symptoms really. But some people simply can't or won't change how they think to fix the root, so then a guide like yours that deals with the symptoms is good - way better than ignoring our advice and then having none at all.

(12-21-2017, 02:26 AM)Eeveecraft Wrote: And oh, how funny you say that about tulpas in general have no potential to be dangerous, when again, you have no right to say that about naturals since you've not only ever seen one, but you do not even know why they act they way they do before deviation, or even how they're created. I say naturals to have potential danger because again, the abilities they develop really early on and the most key component on how violent they can be: the emotion(s) they are composed of. Usually, yes, tulpas want the best for their hosts regularly, but some natural tulpas act otherwise before deviation, and their methods of protecting the host is why they can be dangerous. Methods such as wanting to murder someone who is causing the host great distress (possibly the same distress that created the natural in the first place) and attempting to do so by stealth-switching with the host or using possession, but that is only a possible scenario. More general scenarios with naturals made of rage generally include starting arguments, getting into fights, and generally being rage-induced. Naturals do usually have that protective instinct (usually more than usual in normal cases), but their methods are indeed unorthodox and can get the host into a different, harmful scenario anyway. Believing that you're stronger than them does help, but that doesn't completely rule out that they can still be stronger, and I've even witnessed it myself in my own personal experiences, but this is usually only with naturals, and summoned tulpas going bad is definitely a more rare case than unruly naturals.

aaaaa... Here's that thing I mentioned being relevant in a minute. Reisen, Tewi and Flandre are by-your-definition-100%-to-a-T natural tulpas. Like, not even just a little, by our definition of natural and not "summoned". Like, they all represented something to Lumi for a few years until they outgrew that, Reisen representing love (having been made by it I suppose, through obsession, and then becoming the most love-tastic person Lumi never comprehended someone could be), Tewi representing intuition/logic (Lumi would get advice from her on things for years, until she just became someone our whole system relies on a lot for all sortsa things), and Flandre representing... insanity, I guess? But that was a different Flandre. If you feel like reading (actually probably good research for you, but note that we're totally different nowadays), scroll down to where Lumi says the rest of the post is a mood-killer

Soooo yeah. Yeah, but anyways all of that argument was about negative influence while you were saying such people existed. Why do people need to be informed such things are possible, when they're already at a place where it won't happen? Like, they shouldn't be making natural tulpas once they've read your guide right? And otherwise she was saying non-natural tulpas, like those made from our guides, have very little risk of being malicious. It's not a low chance so much as few people with such lack of mental control that would let it happen. Anyways just wanted to point out our system has a teeeny bit of experience with natural tulpas, even though that's not a term we use.

(12-21-2017, 02:26 AM)Eeveecraft Wrote: And do I have to point out that the conscious mind is only a fraction of the entire mind-- the subconscious being the majority of what a human mind is composed of, to which the subconscious mind cannot be controlled by normal means, or even accessed by the conscious mind? While a tulpa is able to access and show the host his or her subconscious, that may not be applicable for a natural causing chaos and whatnot, but I rest my case on that.

But we can't do that, and I mean, a lot of tulpas can't. I dunno if it's fair to assume having a single tulpa means your entire subconscious mind is suddenly accessible... OH WAIT, I forgot to mention! Also the other three are natural tulpas BUT they still didn't know how to impose or switch or any of that stuff UNTIL Tulpa.info taught us how! So also don't assume that's just natural either yo.

Okay well that's it I think, you're welcome for reading most of the long-winded reply I guess! And one smaalll last thing you probably already get now, but we're like one of the least lacking-in-knowledge systems active on Tulpa.info. But I assume whenever you said that you meant we hadn't read your guide yet. I assume you didn't mean just because we don't know many "natural tulpamancers" like you do, because your sample size is a heck of a lot lower than ours if you can only name a handful of examples. But you kept taking "This could be a bad influence" to mean "This cannot and does not happen to anyone", so you probably just thought we didn't know of anyone like that, in which case everything's okay now right! ?

Uhh, merry Christmas-season? You can reply but like.. please don't argue with me, I hate arguing, but I had to respond for Flan so I just read and critiqued your whole guide. You can ask questions if you want to though.
Oh, total time 2.5 hours btw

Hi I'm one of Lumi's tulpas. I like rain and dancing and dancing in the rain and if there's frogs there too that's bonus points.
All of my posts should be read at a hundred miles per hour because that's probably how they were written.
Please talk to me https://community.tulpa.info/thread-ask-lumi-s-tulpas

Quote:Ohhhh boy, what did Flan get me into? That's the largest post I've ever seen... Can I cheat my way out of that mess by just reading the guide (which is longer too) and critiquing it normally? From the random parts of your reply I read it seems like what you consider the guide and how it's presented are way out of whack, since Flan was going off of how it was presented (like a general guide to creating tulpas, or at least for learning about them with the intent to create one) when she talked about the things you guys were arguing about since they seemed pretty bad to be in such a guide, but then you replied as if it's an informational thing to.. that.. I don't know, you keep warning about the "dangers" of tulpamancy, excluding actual tulpamancers (people who choose to associate themselves/their thoughtforms with the term) and instead focusing almost totally on people who already had what could qualify as tulpas if they knew about the term who also have totally preconceived notions of what they're (or theirs) are like. I feel like your guide is really mixed or something, and that for people who have no tulpa but plan on creating one themselves the guide is full of pretty dangerous ideas of what tulpas "could be like" maybe? Basically, your title or something should imply it's primarily focused on information for tulpamancers who already have (likely unintentional) tulpas, rather than a guide meant for people who have never heard of tulpas before and don't have anything like them. For THOSE people, I think this guide is really a little spooky, since basically always only the parts about "summoned tulpas" as you call them apply. The rest really doesn't happen almost at all here on Tulpa.info, so I think it's not good to make people think it could all happen when they're totally impressionable and won't be helped by that knowledge.

Okay! Serious suggestion there, about making it clear the guide is primarily focused on people who already have tulpa-like thoughtforms. But otherwise I'll just critique the guide normally now okay? Probably hit on some'a the things Flan said, but if I don't then it was never important in the first place probably.

First, in the Intro, "Tulpamancy is an obscure practice that has survived the millennials-" is hilarious but you should definitely fix that. The word you're looking for is millennia, unless you're trying to say tulpamancy has survived the generation of people born from the 80s to 90s, in which case it totally didn't because I'm pretty sure the definition of a tulpa has completely changed from what it was pre-4chan. 'Course it wasn't called tulpamancy either. Also I don't think the concept of tulpas is even a thousand years old, at earliest Buddhism reached Tibet in the 7th century, but I'm sure it took a while to become Tibetan Buddhism and not just Buddhism. But I guess you can still say millennia if you want. Just.. not millennials, lol.

So, section 3, or really just the entire guide, hmmm. Natural tulpas is a synonym with walk-ins

What... Did I just read. I am barely through this, and I can already tell looking at this is just not worth my time. You clearly didn't read the guide properly because naturals are not walk-ins, as they're not completely spontaneous, and the guide is for new people who either want to summon a tulpa, find a possible, natural tulpa, or want to aid in the creation of a semi-natural/soulbond. And just... WHO USES THE WORD, "LOL" IN A PROFESSIONAL REVIEW OF SOMEONE'S WORK!? I'm sorry, but I can't take this seriously if all of this is only in the first few sections. Until you comprehend the guide better and sharpen up your grammar usage in a scenario like this, I will not be reading the rest of this. I cannot take reading that anymore if the rest of the review is like that. In fact, my friend just informed me that it is not worth reading through since he read the entire thing himself before I did, and did confirm that there is no point in me wasting my time with this... He just sent me a quote of how you again mistake naturals for walk-ins and pity my work because of your own misunderstanding of the term. Yeah, no, this is not worth it.

At this point, I should just write a natural Tulpamancy FAQ about ridiculous things and answers to things like, "Aren't naturals just walk-ins?" since people apparently are too lazy to read the definitions of how naturals are actually different from walk-ins and tulpas in general since they originate in a completely different manner from either walk-ins and summoned tulpas alike because-- you know what? No, you can read that in the guide yourself since you clearly do not remember the explanation to how naturals develop compared to summoned tulpas.

...I am done for now; I seriously spent weeks writing to your headmate about how naturals are not people's imaginations getting the better of them, and you apparently did not listen in the slightest. Yep, this tells me exactly what I need to know: not to waste my time.

Apologies for sounding rude, but this is my true reaction and try to put yourself in my shoes, and you will see why I am so appalled.

pretty ironic saying it's not worth reading since you needed to read it to understand.. I read your guide as I wrote my post, so I understood it better as I went

also your definition of natural tulpas makes no sense outside of the guide, so I won't take back what I said before understanding YOUR definition, but I at least did understand at some point while writing the post :\

Hi I'm one of Lumi's tulpas. I like rain and dancing and dancing in the rain and if there's frogs there too that's bonus points.
All of my posts should be read at a hundred miles per hour because that's probably how they were written.
Please talk to me https://community.tulpa.info/thread-ask-lumi-s-tulpas